Silvia Uscov, lawyer: “Although the legislative framework was created with good intentions, the practical implementation has been flawed from the beginning.”

Almost 20 years ago, the Government of Romania promised citizens a new legal instrument for conflict resolution: mediation. Based on Law No. 192/2006, thousands of Romanians were trained to work as mediators. It started with great enthusiasm, but over time, it has proven to be rather ineffective, more and more lawyers argue today.

Mediation was officially introduced in Romania through Law no. 192/2006 on mediation and the organization of the profession of mediator. This was the first regulation that established the legal framework for mediation as an alternative dispute resolution method. The process was influenced by the necessity to align with European Union standards, in the context of Romania’s accession to the EU in 2007, and by Western models of Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR). Subsequently, the law was amended and supplemented, including through harmonization with EU Directive 2008/52/EC.

A fresh breeze is announced in the judicial system between 2006-2010. Mediation as an alternative dispute resolution method has a solid foundation in countries such as the USA, the UK, France, and Germany. These countries have developed mediation systems to reduce court overload and promote amicable resolution of conflicts.

However, in Romania, in practice, many people have considered mediation as a bureaucratic formality imposed before access to justice, not as a real solution. This worsened after the decision of the Constitutional Court (CCR) in 2014, which eliminated the compulsory attendance of the information session. Thus, the impact and relevance of mediation in Romania have significantly decreased.

Controversies regarding the profession of mediator in Romania. Silvia Uscov, lawyer: ‘Although the legislative framework was created with good intentions, the practical implementation has been flawed from the very beginning.’ Mediation has been a dead-on-arrival initiative, considering it was treated by ‘pioneers’ as a business that needs to generate numbers as quickly and as much as possible, warns Silvia Uscov, lawyer.

“Mediation services in Romania have experienced a paradoxical evolution since the adoption of Law no. 192/2006, characterized more by stagnation than by organic development. Although the legislative framework was created with good intentions, practical implementation has been flawed from the start by conceiving mediation as a separate business, rather than as a service for the benefit of the citizen. The proliferation of ‘mediator schools’ and the creation of a parallel certification system have transformed mediation into an industry of dubious profitability, where additional costs for citizens – training fees, session fees – have discouraged the adoption of this alternative,” explained lawyer Silvia Uscov.

Instead, mediation could have been promoted from the top of the Ministry of Justice as an alternative, through the involvement of lawyers and notaries. “Instead of being naturally integrated into existing legal professions, mediation has become a technocratic field, isolated from the daily legal reality, which explains the gradual decline in its use and the lack of trust from litigants.

If lawyers and notaries had been automatically empowered to conduct mediation without mandatory additional training, Romania would have had an integrated and accessible system, rather than an artificially separated one that creates confusion,” Uscov stated. Nevertheless, many Romanian citizens have viewed mediation services with distrust, just as they do now.

Unfortunately, Romanians exhibit a deeply rooted cultural resistance to alternative solutions and negotiations, preferring the certainty of the process, even if it is more costly and time-consuming. This mentality, combined with the extremely low success rate of direct negotiations – about 1% in my current practice, for example – means that most cases inevitably end up in court, despite the fact that mediation could be beneficial for all parties involved and would significantly contribute to alleviating the overwhelmed judicial system,” Silvia Uscov also stated.

Revelations of a mediator: “Mediation was just a business, not a profession” The number of active mediators in Romania has decreased drastically, warns Ilie Dorin, a lawyer, also authorized as a mediator. “I have also been a mediator since 2012 and I know every corner of it. Mediation has been killed by those placed in the leadership of specific structures. These individuals have conducted training schools, earning a few million euros based on a law made in 2012, with the help of Ms. Alina Gorghiu.”

The law was declared unconstitutional, but in the meantime, the people who needed to made millions. Mediation was a business, not a profession. Currently, there are only 150 authorized and active mediators in the country. This is the interest in mediation and the efficiency of this legal solution,” explained lawyer Silvia Uscov.

Source : Silvia Uscov.

By

Robert Williams